Ontario Land Tribunal
Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire
ISSUE DATE: May 09, 2025
CASE NO(S).: OLT-24-001033
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 34(11) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P. 13, as amended.
Appellant: Cambridge Aggregates Inc
Subject: Application to amend the Zoning By-law – Refusal or neglect to make a decision
Description: To permit a new aggregate pit for the extraction of aggregate materials
Reference Number: ZC-01/23
Property Address: Part Lots 16, 27, and 18, Concession 9
Municipality/UT: North Dumfries/Waterloo
OLT Case No: OLT-24-001033
OLT Lead Case No: OLT-24-001033
OLT Case Name: Cambridge Aggregates Inc. v. North Dumfries (Township)
Heard: April 14, 2025 by Video Hearing
APPEARANCES:
Parties Counsel
Cambridge Aggregates Inc. ("Applicant/Appellant") Jonathan Kahn
Township of North Dumfries ("Township") Michael Bodegom
North Dumfries Conservation Alliance ("NDCA") Alex Ciccone
MEMORANDUM OF ORAL DECISION DELIVERED BY L.P. YOU ON aPRIL 14, 2025 AND ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL
INTRODUCTION
1This is the first Case Management Conference ("CMC") respecting an appeal by the Applicant under s. 34(11) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P. 13, as amended regarding the Township’s failure to make a decision on the Zoning By-law Amendment application ("Application") to permit a new aggregate pit for the extraction of aggregate materials on the lands municipally known as Part Lots 16, 27, and 18, Concession 9 ("Subject Lands").
Service of Notice of CMC
2There is no issue with service of the Notice of this CMC, and so no further notice is required. The Tribunal received an Affidavit of Service from Amanda Burke, which is marked as Exhibit 1.
Requests for Status
3The Tribunal received one written request for Party status from NDCA, which is an incorporated, not-for-profit community association, representing residents within the Township and from the greater area. In the written statement of NDCA, NDCA expressed concerns about impacts of the Application to natural resources, environment, cultural heritage resources, and farmlands on the Subject Lands and surrounding area.
4The Appellant argued that it was unnecessary to grant Party status to NDCA, but no evidence was provided to support this argument.
5The Township expressed no objection to grant NDCA Party status.
6The Tribunal finds that NDCA has grounds for their request and grants Party status to NDCA, represented by Mr. Ciccone.
7Ms. Carol Walthers was granted Participant status on consent from parties.
MEDIATION AND SETTLEMENT
8The Tribunal explored the possibility of mediation and settlement with the Parties and encouraged Parties to narrow down the scope of the issues for a future hearing. The Parties agreed to keep the Tribunal apprised of any resolution efforts, which the Tribunal finds satisfactory.
PROCEDURAL ORDER AND ISSUES LIST
9The Tribunal received and reviewed a draft Procedural Order from the Parties. The Tribunal finds it acceptable, and the proceedings shall be governed by it (see Attachment 1).
HEARING
10Upon request of the Parties, the Tribunal set an eight (8)-day Merit Hearing commencing on Monday, October 27, 2025 to Wednesday, November 5, 2025 at 10 a.m. by Video Hearing.
11Parties and Participants are asked to log in to the Video Hearing at least 15 minutes before the start of the event to test their video and audio connections:
GoTo Meeting: https://meet.goto.com/357283957
Access Code: 357-283-957
12Parties and Participants are asked to access and set up the application well in advance of the event to avoid unnecessary delay. The desktop application can be downloaded at GoTo Meeting or a web application is available: https://app.gotomeeting.com/home.html
13Persons who experience technical difficulties accessing the GoTo Meeting application or who only wish to listen to the event can connect to the event by calling in to an audio-only telephone line: 1-888-455-1389 (Toll Free) or +1 (647) 497-9391. The Access Code is as indicated above.
14Individuals are directed to connect to the event on the assigned date at the correct time. It is the responsibility of the persons participating in the hearing by video to ensure that they are properly connected to the event at the correct time. Questions prior to the hearing event may be directed to the Tribunal’s Case Coordinator having carriage of this case.
ORDER
15The Tribunal Orders That:
the date and particulars of the Merit Hearing are set out above; and,
the draft Procedural Order appended as Attachment 1 shall govern the conduct of the proceedings.
16The Member is not seized but may be spoken to through the Case Coordinator if any issues arise.
"L.P. You"
L.P. You
MEMBER
Ontario Land Tribunal
Website: www.olt.gov.on.ca Telephone: 416-212-6349 Toll Free: 1-866-448-2248
The Conservation Review Board, the Environmental Review Tribunal, the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal and the Mining and Lands Tribunal are amalgamated and continued as the Ontario Land Tribunal ("Tribunal"). Any reference to the preceding tribunals or the former Ontario Municipal Board is deemed to be a reference to the Tribunal.
ATTACHMENT 1
Procedural Order
ISSUE DATE: CASE NO.: OLT-24-001033
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER UNDER section 34(11) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P. 13, as amended
Applicant/Appellant: Cambridge Aggregates Inc.
Subject: Application to amend the Zoning By-law – Refusal or neglect to make a decision
Description: A non-decision for a Zoning By-law Amendment to permit an aggregate pit.
Reference Number: ZC/01/23
Property Address: Part Lots 16, 17 and 18, Concession 9
Municipality/UT: North Dumfries/Waterloo
OLT Case No: OLT-24-001033
OLT Lead Case No: OLT-24-001033
OLT Case Name: Cambridge Aggregates Inc. v. North Dumfries (Township)
- The Tribunal may vary or add to the directions in this procedural order at any time by an oral ruling or by another written order, either on the parties’ request or its own motion.
Organization of the Hearing
- The video hearing will begin on October 27, 2025, at 10:00 a.m. :
Parties are asked to log in to the CMC at least 15 minutes before the start of the event to test their video and audio connections: GoTo Meeting: https://meet.goto.com/357283957
Access Code: 357-283-957
The parties’ initial estimation for the length of the hearing is 8 days. The parties are expected to cooperate to reduce the length of the hearing by eliminating redundant evidence and attempting to reach settlements on issues where possible.
The parties and participants identified are set out in Attachment 1.
The issues are set out in the Issues List attached as Attachment 2. There will be no additions to this list unless the Tribunal permits, and a party who asks for additions to the list may have costs awarded against it.
The order of evidence shall be as set out in Attachment 3. The Tribunal may limit the amount of time allocated for opening statements, evidence in chief (including the qualification of witnesses), cross-examination, evidence in reply and final argument. The length of written argument, if any, may be limited either on the parties’ consent, subject to the Tribunal’s approval, or by Order of the Tribunal.
Any person intending to participate in the hearing should provide a mailing address, email address and a telephone number to the Tribunal as soon as possible – ideally before the case management conference. Any person who will be retaining a representative should advise the other parties and the Tribunal of the representative’s name, address, email address and the phone number as soon as possible.
Any person who intends to participate in the hearing, including parties, counsel and witnesses, is expected to review the Tribunal’s Video Hearing Guide, available on the Tribunal’s website.
Requirements Before the Hearing
A party who intends to call witnesses, whether by summons or not, shall provide to the Tribunal and the other parties a list of the witnesses and the order in which they will be called. This list must be delivered on or before June 6, 2025 and in accordance with paragraph 22 below. A party who intends to call an expert witness must include a copy of the witness’ Curriculum Vitae and the area of expertise in which the witness is prepared to be qualified.
Expert witnesses in the same field shall have a meeting on or before July 16, 2025 and use best efforts to try to resolve or reduce the issues for the hearing. Following the experts’ meeting the parties must prepare and file a Statement of Agreed Facts and Issues with the OLT case co-ordinator on or before July 31, 2025.
An expert witness shall prepare an expert witness statement, which shall list any reports prepared by the expert, or any other reports or documents to be relied on at the hearing. Copies of this must be provided as in paragraph 13 below. Instead of a witness statement, the expert may file his or her entire report if it contains the required information. If this is not done, the Tribunal may refuse to hear the expert’s testimony.
Expert witnesses who are under summons but not paid to produce a report do not have to file an expert witness statement; but the party calling them must file a brief outline of the expert’s evidence as in paragraph 13 below. A party who intends to call a witness who is not an expert must file a brief outline of the witness’ evidence, as in paragraph 13 below.
On or before August 29, 2025, the parties shall provide copies of their witness and expert witness statements to the other parties and to the OLT case co-ordinator and in accordance with paragraph 22 below.
On or before August 29, 2025, a participant shall provide copies of their written participant statement to the other parties in accordance with paragraph 22 below. A participant cannot present oral submissions at the hearing on the content of their written statement, unless ordered by the Tribunal.
On or before September 12, 2025, the parties shall confirm with the Tribunal if all the reserved hearing dates are still required.
On or before October 13, 2025, the parties shall provide copies of their visual evidence to all of the other parties in accordance with paragraph 22 below. If a model will be used, all parties must have a reasonable opportunity to view it before the hearing.
Parties may provide to all other parties and the OLT case co-ordinator a written response to any written evidence on or before September 26, 2025 and in accordance with paragraph 22 below.
The parties shall cooperate to prepare a joint document book which shall be shared with the OLT case co-ordinator on or before October 13, 2025.
A person wishing to change written evidence, including witness statements, must make a written motion to the Tribunal. See Rule 10 of the Tribunal’s Rules with respect to Motions, which requires that the moving party provide copies of the motion to all other parties 15 days before the Tribunal hears the motion.
A party who provides written evidence of a witness to the other parties must have the witness attend the hearing to give oral evidence, unless the party notifies the Tribunal at least 7 days before the hearing that the written evidence is not part of their record.
The parties shall prepare and file a preliminary hearing plan with the Tribunal on or before October 20, 2025 a proposed schedule for the hearing that identifies, as a minimum, the parties participating in the hearing, the preliminary matters (if any to be addressed), the anticipated order of evidence, the date each witness is expected to attend, the anticipated length of time for evidence to be presented by each witness in chief, cross-examination and re-examination (if any) and the expected length of time for final submissions. The parties are expected to ensure that the hearing proceeds in an efficient manner and in accordance with the hearing plan. The Tribunal may, at its discretion, change or alter the hearing plan at any time in the course of the hearing.
All filings shall be submitted electronically and in hard copy. Electronic copies may be filed by email, an electronic file sharing service for documents that exceed 10MB in size, or as otherwise directed by the Tribunal. The delivery of documents by email shall be governed by the Rule 7.
No adjournments or delays will be granted before or during the hearing except for serious hardship or illness. The Tribunal’s Rule 17 applies to such requests.
This Member is not seized.
So orders the Tribunal.
BEFORE:
Name of Member:
Date:
TRIBUNAL REGISTRAR
ATTACHMENT 1
PARTIES AND PARTICIPANTS
Parties
Cambridge Aggregates Inc. Township of North Dumfries The North Dumfries Conservation Alliance
Participants
Carol Walthers
ATTACHMENT 2
Issues List
township of north dumfries issues
- Does the Zoning By-law Amendment consider the appropriate improvements for the proposed development in accordance with Regional Official Plan Policies 5.A.1, 5.A.23, 5.A.25, 5.A.30, 5.A.31, and 5.A.32, as well as Township Official Plan Policies 3.3.2.1, 3.3.4.3, 3.3.4.4, and 3.3.10.1, particularly with respect to transportation-related impacts on the Spragues Road corridor and the proposed Alps Road At-Grade Road Crosssing? Specifically, primary issues relate to:
i. Whether there is a need for the traffic impact study (TIS) to consider a 15-year horizon period to assess the traffic impact / mitigation requirements, considering the type and duration of pit operations;
ii. Whether the TIS should provide sufficient justification for the traffic growth rates assumed in the analysis, including provision of growth forecasts in Ayr and Cambridge, that will impact growth on Spragues Road;
iii. Should it be confirmed that the April 2022 background traffic counts taken for the TIS were not impacted by COVID;
iv. Consideration of the high operating speeds on Spragues Road and the potential impact on gravel truck movements into and out of the proposed access points and between the accesses
v. Should a northbound left turn lane be provided at the north access on Spragues Road;
vi. Have sight distances at the accesses on Spragues Road and the at-grade road crossing at Alps Road, based on combination truck movements, been appropriately considered;
vii. Is there a need to consider an acceleration lane and/or left turn lane at the north access on Spragues Road to maintain safety;
viii. Should a fully paved shoulder to facilitate southbound right turn movements at the south access be provided;
ix. Should additional review be made at the existing at-grade Alps Road crossing to provide for enhance safety for crossing movements over the life of the proposed aggregate operation
Does the Zoning By-law Amendment establish the appropriate regulatory uses (primary and ancillary) and provisions for the proposed aggregate operation in accordance with Regional Official Plan Policies 9.C.3, 9.F.1, 9.F.2, and 9.F.3, as well as Township Official Plan Policies 5.2.1.4, 5.2.5.7 and 5.2.8.3 and in consideration of the interface with the adjacent lands?
Does the Zoning By-law Amendment establish the appropriate regulatory uses and provisions for the proposed aggregate operation (including ancillary uses) in accordance with the Regional Official Plan Policies 9.C.3 c) and d), 9.C.4, 9.C.7, 9.C.8, 9.C.10., and 9.C.11, as well as Township Official Plan Policies 5.2.1.4, 5.2.4.3, 5.2.4.4 b), c) and d), 5.2.5.2, 5.2.5.3, 5.2.5.7 and 5.2.5.8?
Does the proposed Zoning By-law Amendment appropriately reflect the influences of the adjacent Environmentally Sensitive Landscape and Core Environmental Feature (and the associated buffer) associated with the Dumfries Carolinian Environmentally Sensitive Landscape complex as illustrated on Map 4 of the Regional Official Plan and in accordance with Regional Official Plan Policies 7.C.1, 7.C.2, 7.C.9, 7.C.10, 7.C.11, 7.G.1, and 7.G.3, as well as on Map 5A of the Township Official Plan and in accordance with Township Official Plan Policies 6.1.7.1, 6.1.7.2, 6.1.7.5, 6.1.7.6, 6.3.1.1 and 6.3.1.4?
Does the proposed Zoning By-law Amendment appropriately implement the Region of Waterloo Official Plan pertaining to Environmentally Sensitive Landscapes as illustrated on Map 4 of the Regional Official Plan and Map 5A of the Township Official Plan and Policies 7.B.9, 7.B.12, 7.B.13, 7.B.14 of the Regional Official Plan and Policies 6.1.3.2, 6.1.3.7, and 6.1.3.9 of the Township Official Plan?
Does the proposed Zoning By-law Amendment implement the Region of Waterloo Official Plan pertaining to Source Water Protection Areas as illustrated on Map 6e of the Regional Official Plan and Map 4 of the Township Official Plan and Policies 8.A.1, 8.A.4, and 8.A.5 of the Regional Official Plan and Policies 5.3.1.1, 5.3.1.2, 5.3.4 and 5.3.1.9 of the Township Official Plan.?
Does the proposed Zoning By-law Amendment establish and facilitate the progressive and comprehensive rehabilitation of the proposed aggregate pit as an interim use in accordance with Regional Official Plan Policies 6.A.6, 9.C.3 b), c) and d) and 9.C.4 and Township Official Plan Policies 5.2.3.4, 5.2.4.4, 5.2.5.8 b), 5.2.5.9, 5.2.8.2 and 5.2.8.3 a) to e) inclusive?
Does the proposed Zoning By-law Amendment adequately address the technical requirements as outlined in Regional Official Plan Policy 9.C.3 b), c) and d) and Township Official Plan Policy 5.2.4.4 b), c) and d) as it relates to new mineral aggregate operations?
Is the proposed Zoning By-law Amendment in conformity with the Provincial Planning Statement 2024?
a) 2.5 (Rural Areas in Municipalities);
b) 3.2.1 (Transportation Systems);
c) 4.1.1 & 4.1.2 (Natural Heritage);
d) 4.2.1 (Water)
North Dumfries Conservation Alliance Issues
Would approval of the proposed amendment to the Township of North Dumfries Zoning By-law (the "proposed zoning by-law amendment") have appropriate regard to matters of provincial interest as set out in section 2 of the Planning Act, in particular sub-sections 2 (a), (b), (d), (e), (n) and (o), insofar as they relate to the specific issues set out herein?
Is the proposed zoning by-law amendment consistent with the Provincial Planning Statement 2024, in particular, policies:
a) 2.5. (Rural Areas in Municipalities);
b) 3.5 (Land Use Compatibility);
c) 4.1 (Natural Heritage);
d) 4.2 (Water);
e) 4.3 (Agriculture);
f) 4.5 (Mineral Aggregate Resources); and
g) 4.6 (Cultural Heritage and Archaeology)? All insofar as they relate to the specific issues set out herein.
- Does the proposed zoning by-law amendment conform with the Region of Waterloo Official Plan (ROP), and in particular:
a) Section 3.8 (Objectives), 3.G.1, 3.G.5, 3.G.6, 3.G.7, 3.G.14, 3.G.15, 3.G.17, 3.G.18, 3.G.22 and 3.G.27 to (Cultural Heritage Resources) as it relates to impacts on the nearby Candidate Cultural Heritage Landscape features and Spragues Road as a scenic road;
b) Sections 6.1 and 6.2 (Objectives), 6.A.7 and 6.A.9 (Countryside), 6.B.1 (Protected Countryside) pertaining to the loss of Prime Agricultural lands;
c) Sections 7.1 (Objectives), 7.B.9, 7.B.12, 7.B.13 and 7.B.14 (Landscape Level Systems/Environmentally Sensitive Landscapes), 7.C.1, 7.C.2, 7.C.9, 7.C.10, and 7.C.11 (Core Environmental Features), and 7.G.1 and 7.G.3 (Environmental Impact Statements) regarding negative impacts on significant woodlots, wetlands and the habitat of species at risk and endangered and threatened species;
d) Sections 8.A.4 and 8.A.5 (Source Protection) at is relates to impacts on well water resources and water recharge areas;
e) Section 9.C.3 and 9.C.4, 9.C.7, 9.C.8, 9.C.10, 9.C.11, 9.F.2 and 9.F.3 (Mineral Aggregate Resources) regarding the long term and cumulative impacts, loss of agricultural lands, adequacy of the technical studies submitted, fulfilment of the review criteria, and appropriateness of the proposed site rehabilitation? All insofar as they relate to the specific issues set out herein.
Does the proposed zoning by-law amendment appropriately address the requirements under ROP Policy 9.C.4 with regards to the potential cumulative impacts that may result from a proposed new mineral aggregate operation when added to other past, present and proposed future mineral aggregate operations in the vicinity of the proposed new operation?
Does the proposed zoning by-law amendment conform with the Township of North Dumfries Official Plan (TOP), and in particular:
a) Section 1.5 (1), (2), (3), (4) and (5) (Goals) regarding the suitability of the site for the proposed use;
b) Sections 2.6.10.6 (Agricultural), 2.6.11.1 and 2.6.11.2 (Protected Countryside), 2.6.12.1 and 2.6.12.2 (Environmental Constraint) pertaining to the loss of Prime Agricultural lands and impacts on natural heritage features;
c) Section 3.1.1 (Compatibility) regarding the overall compatibility of the proposed quarry with surrounding uses;
d) Section 3.3.11 (Scenic Roads) pertaining to adverse impacts on the heritage attributes found along Spragues Road and other nearby roads;
e) Sections 3.3.4.3 and 3.3.4.4 (Transportation Impact Study Requirements) and 3.3.10 (Truck Routes) regarding the suitability of Spragues Road as a haul route and impacts to cultural heritage attributes;
f) Sections 5.1 (Agricultural Resources) pertaining to the loss of Prime Agricultural lands;
g) Sections 5.2.1.4, 5.2.3.4, 5.2.4.1, 5.2.4.3, 5.2.4.4 (b), (c) and (d), 5.2.5.2, 5.2.5.3, 5.2.5.6, 5.2.5.7, 5.2.5.8, 5.2.5.9, 5.2.8.2 and 5.2.8.3 (a) to (e) (Mineral Aggregate Resources) regarding the long term impacts, loss of agricultural lands, adequacy of the technical studies submitted, fulfilment of the review criteria, ancillary uses and appropriateness of the proposed site rehabilitation;
h) Sections 6.1.3.2, 6.1.3.7, and 6.1.3.9 (Environmentally Sensitive Landscapes), 6.1.7.1, 6.1.7.2, 6.1.7.5, 6.1.7.6 (Core Environmental Features), 6.1.9, 6.1.9.3 (b), (d) and (e) (Supporting Environmental Features) and 6.3.1.1 and 6.3.1.4 (Environmental Impact Statements) regarding impacts on significant woodlots, wetlands and the habitat of species at risk and endangered and threatened species; and
i) Sections 7.1, 7.1.4, 7.2.2, 7.2.3, 7.3, 7.4, 7.5.3, 7.5.5 (Heritage Resource Management) as it relates to impacts on the nearby Candidate Cultural Heritage Landscape features and Spragues Road as a scenic road? All insofar as they relate to the specific issues set out herein.
Does the proposed zoning by-law amendment recognize and appropriately address the impacts on the identified Cultural Heritage Landscape attributes found along Spragues Road ?
Will the proposed zoning by-law amendment result in any unacceptable adverse impacts on natural heritage features and functions, and specifically regarding impacts on significant woodlots, wetlands and the habitat of species at risk and endangered and threatened species? If yes, what mitigation and monitoring measures could address those impacts?
Will the proposed zoning by-law amendment result in any unacceptable adverse traffic impacts? If yes, what mitigation and monitoring measures could address such impacts?
If the Tribunal does approve the proposed zoning by-law amendment, what is the appropriate form of the zoning by-law and should any conditions be imposed on that approval?
Does the proposed zoning by-law amendment represent good planning, and is it in the public interest?
ATTACHMENT 3
ORDER OF EVIDENCE
Cambridge Aggregates Inc. Township of North Dumfries The North Dumfries Conservation Alliance Cambridge Aggregates Inc. Reply